Stosh

Hmm, googled FP and health and get Family Planning,,, sooo .. FP might be a 'no-fap' policy in modern parlance , without the philosophy. Just guessing tho . 

But any emotional impact you have on others or others on you , is actually a pressure of sorts aint it? Most people will want to protect themself from the accusation of being affected by group dynamics. Which means, they dont consider the other people as significant to them emotionally.

 

Things which are thought to be affirmative get lumped as good , and dissuasive stuff,is lumped as bad. 

So if you are sweet and gentle about someone elses self destructive actions , or perpetuate misery of that person by giving them a big hug whenever they are self defeating, you can still get a personal rating as good. 

On the other hand , you are honest about a difficult subject someone doesnt want to deal with, you get labeled as harsh.

Thats just how it is. 

2 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Turkeys aren't good followers.  Pretty much do as they please.  May even be more independent than cats.

 

 

Probably , but Sophie's independence seems to vary with her circumstance.

I've read they can rehydrate on seawater. 

It looks like there may now be two maps going on? Nevermind , two threads, one map , ok. 

59 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

I saw, after adding myself, it says to keep the special URL to do any edits.  If you have that, it will open an edit box with a delete option.

 

Otherwise, the message said you can not edit that person/location without that special link.

Done,,  Wow , you're close by, I thought you were farther north west. 

She and I were walking along , I took a hard turn looking for my car, and she shrank down to a little turkey pecking at fire ants. 

Dont ask what that means but , the discipline for tau is not absenteeism .

The wording in this does kind of indicate an attitude of expecting inaction as magically being some kind of fix for everything. Just sit there like a stuffed shirt, like Nero playing music while Rome burned. But all it has done is relegate affairs of state to his ministers, Richard III would have giggled in glee having all the world to bustle in. 

Its one thing if you speak of nonaction as a replacement of force with slick impartial rulership, and its another to suggest being AWOL.

If Mair thinks this has warpage, then I agree with Mair.

On Friday, December 22, 2017 at 7:29 PM, manitou said:

I just figured something out.

 

Grief is the price tag for Compassion

I wont tell you not to look at it that way, but Im just going to point out , that if you then wish to consider yourself compassionate, you cant finish up with the grieving. 

 So if you realized you have been thinking in this vein,, maybe youre getting ready to.

dunno

Yeah, theyre terriffic birds. There was a flock in the eves of the building next door when I was a kid. The swirling motion of them collectively flying evasively is incredible.

Unmasked , the chaper reads as follows ,

 

 

Those who follow the Way, are simple obvious and easy to relate to. 
You can recognize who the sage is , because he appears as follows. 

He is carefree , knowing the earth is not going to suddenly open up and swallow him.
The way of the world is completely dependable. 

 

He is outgoing , because he befriends all.
 And does not treat neighbors like strangers. 

He is frank and sincere , because he is among his friends. 

 

He doesnt change his mind , until he has good reason. 
But once he does , the old form is forgotten., and he moves on. 

He is full of life and energy. 
He is a light in a dark forest. 

 

No one is perfect , nor can become what he is not. 

No one can change the way the world is, nor has life a destiny to fail at. 

Not to live this way is foolish,
 and such a one has not experienced his life to the brim.

 

Stosh 
 

46 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Yeah, but I will remain on the side of action with caution which is what I feel the first two sections peak to.

 

But then adventurers often throw caution to the winds, don't they?

 

They, and us fools do.  

20 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Well, that's a different perspective.  (I'm still trying to be without my own opinion so I will stop here.)

 

 

The point is to understand the perspective of what has been written , I think he dodged the point , that this thing can still be seen in both perspectives ,, the issue remains whether he likes certain  presentations to others, or not. 

In old times the perfect man of Tao was subtle, penetrating and so profound that he can hardly be understood.
Because he cannot be understood, I shall endeavour to picture him:

He is cautious, like one who crosses a stream in winter;

He is hesitating, like one who fears his neighbours;

He is modest, like one who is a guest;
He is yielding, like ice that is going to melt;

He is simple, like wood that is not yet wrought;

He is vacant, like valleys that are hollow;

He is dim, like water that is turbid.
Who is able to purify the dark till it becomes slowly light?

Who is able to calm the turbid till it slowly clears?

Who is able to quicken the stagnant till it slowly makes progress?
He who follows these principles does not desire fullness.

Because he is not full, therefore when he becomes decayed he can renew.

 

If he IS,  then he is not the man of Old times. 

Crossing a river in winter , is not cautious , unless its frozen and therefore no big deal. You just trudge across. 

One who fears his neighbors , is likely to be hostile at a moments notice. 

Ice un-melted is still hard , ice that is actually melted, is yielding.

Wood unhewn has the great complexity of living things , and it is reduced in its chopping to some particular example of its original potential. 

The hemmed in valley fills its bounds. 

Water that is turbid is opaque and defined , you can actually see where it is. 

Distilled darkness is still dark , very very dark.

One cannot do anything to calm turbid waters.

There is nothing unprogressed  because there is 'nothing needing to be done'. 

Following principles, has an intended aim ,and therefore indicates desire. 

If one is not finished there's no need to restart. 

2 hours ago, dawei said:

 

It is an interesting inquiry but I think a distinction without a difference.

 

If we keep the entire chapter together, the opening is about the "ancient masters" ... 

 

Now, re-read it with this idea carried down through the entire chapter...

Reading Legge from that perspective has the old masters Seeming muddy minded not clear , but presumes that if one becomes nonjudgemental , the irrationality would resolve as not being as crazy as it might seem at first. Otherwise, the old masters are described accurately as muddy minded and unsettled...which wouldnt be encouraging anyone to settle down... which brings us back to the right action arising From a muddled mind, doesnt it? It seems to Work out,  that the right mental state is not clarity but obscurity. It that your contention? The opposite of Mitchell?

59 minutes ago, Mig said:

Does those lines are closed to the original meaning or some other translations? I am trying to figure if the message is conveyed or if it is far from the original text or any translations that has been posted here. Thanks

To me this version has a bit of a different intent as compared to the larger group of interpretations, but since I can't read ancient Classical Chinese, few do , I surely couldn't say it was wrong. It just isn't all that similar to the others presented as a group. 

It does look similar to Feng though., to me.

On 12/25/2017 at 8:18 PM, nestentrie said:

Hmm. What answer do these people think they have hit upon? I'm afraid I don't follow this part.

My answer as an alternative plausible interp , hinges on the idea that the outlined physical sensory phenomena result in one being entrapped somehow,,

How, You might ask ?

And I would say that instead of being free from 'carrots and sticks'

we can get dragged around trying to indulge and avoid stuff ,,  like the rich dudes mentioned.

They think that they can successfully wallow in the riches they attained,, (and maybe one CAN pat themselves on the back with the idea that they have it all , you'd have to decide) 

But there's downsides to attaining the objects of their desires because they are material - they run out of bang for the buck Besides, Potential friends and spouses now want a piece of the action,

and they have to maintain this supply of dopamine , 

get dragged into situations they don't want to be in , and so forth.

Instead of foremost being concerned with attaining spiritual satisfactions, ease, freedom, friends and the like, They amass stuff or ride a roller coaster , keep up with the Joneses  , run the rat race. 

The normal attitude is that more is always better , some daoists disagreed and felt one would have more satisfactions if they allowed themselves to appreciate simple pleasures.

As one guy put it  "lower the bar, and score more". 

43 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Interesting perspective of me regarding Nietzsche.  All things considered, I think Chuang Tzu holds a higher position for me than does Nietzsche.  But then, as I read Nietzsche prior to ever reading Lao Tzu or Chuang Tzu it should be understood that Nietzsche set me up with the roots of my views in order to feel closer to Chuang Tzu than I otherwise would have.

 

 

I stand corrected, but unabashed, since it seems like Cz you quote, but Fred you explain and get energetic about. Buts its not like I did a survey to check. Perhaps we both feel about ,and react to certain authors, in complex fashion.

I was watching come classic movies last night , Rear window with Grace Kelly ,  and North by northwest with Eva Marie Saint..I used to prefer Grace, but Eva,, , had her own very nice thing going on. 

34 minutes ago, nestentrie said:

So what do we discuss now? Any other chapter discussion anyone can recommend?

 

Mh has a whole slew to revive, and when in attendance , he is responsive.. likes Neitzche more methinks. Generally we just wait on his installments though. 

22 hours ago, nestentrie said:

I live a pretty isolated life. Apart from a few trips a week to the bottl-o and tobacconist I'm home most of the time. I have family that I keep in contact with, and friends online, but for the most part I don't deal with society at large. My life is all online.

 

I could talk about the things behind that, I guess. I could talk about mass media and the manufacture of consent, and I could talk about globalisation, but I don't suppose it goes close enough to the question.

 

Is humanity at large corrupt and degraded? No more or no less that at any other time in history. Progress is always measured by how far fascism can go before there's a regression, and that fascism can occur on any side of the political demarcation.

Humility has its place. Staking one's claim to one's lot, and allowing no further interference goes some way towards reliance on the sanctity of virtue. Yet for me that's a given. I adopt earnestness.

If I were to divide myself from the world I judge, I would be cutting my tether to the source. I don't see the profit in drawing lines and choosing a side on which to stand. If I'm to one side, then those that are on that side are my friends. If by erosion or deliberate interference the lines are redrawn and i find myself on a different side with different people, then I tune my efforts for that side and those people.

 

Sure, if one can see that one is surrounded by arseholes then it can be a burden, but because a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, and all light is given, strength can still be borrowed. Didn't the sage say that he doesn't expect the speedy fulfillment of a deal? It doesn't matter if he's the virtuous one among many defectives, because his weakness is always going to be the hinge on what people rely. No one is so far gone that the sage can't be their friend.

Not the greatest post I've ever made, but it's a difficult question. 

It was a very good post, and unless I am being extra special gentle, instead of genuine, I try not to ask either easy or impossible questions. 

I think about that Kind of thing myself. I figure it might yeild insight . 

Ive tried the other but get bored really fast.

 

I was inviting your personal input on the overall virtue of overall humanity. Your own summary . If you feel the texts have been impactful to you personally, my question asks what it is you now think. Rather than refer back to what others said. 

Do you conclude humanity sucks? How do you maintain humility if virtue does not thrive around you? Or is it that you feel you are less virtuous than your peers. 

The question is about how one might most wisely relate to ,or judge society, virtue-wise. As you see it. 

Sj is just one of those rare honest men , problematic yes but Understandable if you can match him. .. so I think I understand his point. Your point is a bit elusive as of yet . 

I guess i should explain or disclose .. I am confused. Im disappointed a lot. I dont understand why people act the way we do.while i would really like to get along better , somehow it doesnt work out. For instance, Today a lady asked me if I had seen or photograhed any thing interesting. So I told her There was a surf scoter (bird) at the other beach. She didnt care and said Thats good. Then she said someting about the weather, so I fed her back her Thats good. Which pissed her off. 

 

What the hell am I supposed to say? The clouds have lessened? She can see the sky herself, and if she doesnt care about the bird , what does she think I could photograph ? The goddam ringling bros circus?

i figure she is a decent person but she doesnt make sense to me. 

10 hours ago, Starjumper said:

 

Ah so, you're going to make me work for that one.  For starters I refer you to Lao Tzu's comment about the sage treating people like straw dogs.  To me that means that the sage still can love people and treat them right wile at the same time knowing that they are, or will be, burning in hell ... most of the time (which people get used to and think is normal).   The question about himility is very good and that's the one that will take some work  ... anyone?

From each according to their ability..His Staw dogs thing is very good.; Im curious what youd say on it, works for you?. I have an answer As well but it feels forced. In some ways  I guess I have retreated , cut em loose. I certainly am not highly integrated. 

 

Nestentrie , Wanna give this subject a twirl ?

On Friday, December 22, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Marblehead said:

Hey Stosh!  There's still hope and faith.

 

Cruel cruel hope and faith .  

While individuals may be fine ,collectively humanity has a lot to fix.I agree with Cz that the good is outnumbered or outweighed. I dont really know if all other cultures end up the same, I hope not. Im not at all surprised if Sj is entirely correct..that taking an impartial and broad look at humanity, tends to be a bummer. Its Christmas , and my ride home friday really had me concerned that this was going to be a Highly lethal weeked.With all the erratic driving.